Skip to content
Kylen Evans

#2Kylen Evans

Kylen Evans is a Versatile WR for Texas State.

What projects, and what doesn't · WRs · held out 2019-2025

How well one season predicts the next, measured on seasons the model never trained on. 1.00 would be perfectly predictable; 0.00 means last year told us nothing.

  • Usage share (volume)0.47
    Beats guessing the WR average by 16%. n=6,302 WR seasons
  • EPA per play (efficiency)0.09
    Not projectable — we do not forecast this. n=5,767 WR seasons
  • Total EPA (value)0.45
    Beats guessing the WR average by 12%. n=5,767 WR seasons

Across all positions, usage carries year to year at 0.47 and efficiency at 0.07. So Kylen Evans's projection is a projection of opportunity — how much of the offense he runs through. How well he converts it is something this model does not claim to know a year in advance, and the number above is why.

2025 Production

Receiving
15 Receptions211 Rec yards1 Rec TD14.1 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume13
  • Explosiveness47
  • Consistency58
  • Pass-Down100
Player type
Versatile WR

Balanced profile without a single dominant trait — contributes across multiple dimensions.

Balanced usageMulti-role
Peer percentiles
Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)100th %ile · elite
Game-to-game consistency58th %ile · average
Key findings
  • Top-10% efficiency among WRs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
  • Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
  • 4 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
  • Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
  • Strong second-half surge — EPA/play improved 0.63 from the first to second half of the season.
  • Peak game: 1.63 EPA/play in Wk 6 vs Arkansas State (SP+ -9).

NIL Market Tier· 2025

On3 valuation ↗
Star

Top-10 nationally. Multiple mid-to-large collective deals expected.

Tier is a model estimate based on position, school brand, performance rank, and usage — not a reported deal. NIL deals are private. For a real market valuation, see On3's NIL profile, which factors in social following and actual deal tracking.

Historical Comparables · WR · efficiency + volume + value

Players from 2013–2025 matched on EPA efficiency, play volume, and adjusted value tier — not just one metric.

PlayerTeamWEPA/playLine valTotal EPA
Keytaon ThompsonVirginia0.3200.412.5
Nick NashSan José State0.3100.514.0
Cade HarrisAir Force0.3300.514.8
Ainias SmithTexas A&M0.3100.517.0
Keytaon ThompsonVirginia0.3700.615.2

Comps are statistical — efficiency, volume, and value tier all factor in. Style and conference context differ.

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+1.6301.63Wk 1 vs Eastern Michigan: +0.28 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs UTSA: -0.10 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Arizona State: -0.03 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Nicholls: +0.47 EPA/play4Wk 6 vs Arkansas State: +1.63 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Troy: +1.25 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Marshall: -0.44 EPA/play8Wk 10 vs James Madison: +0.69 EPA/play10
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
1vsEastern MichiganW52-27-14.711313.00130.28
2@UTSAW43-363.7177.007-0.10
3@Arizona StateL15-343.94246.0111-0.03
4vsNichollsW35-348822.00450.47
6@Arkansas StateL30-31-8.811313.00131.63
7vsTroyL41-48-4.833712.30211.25
8@MarshallL37-40-4.5-0.44
10vsJames MadisonL20-5212.312929.00290.69

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
4.7%
Passing plays
11.5%
Rushing plays
0.0%
Standard downs
4.8%
Passing downs
4.6%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.14
Passing downs
0.78
Pass / Rush EPA
0.32 / —

Usage = share of team plays (CFBD has no true snap counts).

EPA = expected points added (opponent-adjusted). NIL estimates are model-based ranges, not reported deals. Data: CollegeFootballData. Not betting advice.